A Competitive Model for Rural Agricultural Development: Insights from Family Farming in Lebrija, Santander, Colombia

Abstract

Family farming is essential for rural development and food security, yet it faces persistent structural barriers. This study aimed to develop a competitive model for Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA) in Lebrija, Colombia, by analyzing key factors affecting productivity, profitability, and competitiveness. A mixed-methods approach was used, integrating surveys, participatory workshops, and field visits across 79 family agricultural units (FAUs). Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and ordinal logistic regression (OLR) identified the impact of financial exclusion, low mechanization, and dependence on intermediaries, alongside strengths such as traditional knowledge transfer, family labor, and agroecological practices. The findings reveal a paradox: while PFCA resilience supports agricultural sustainability, it may also hinder modernization. To address this, a strategic action plan was developed with six axes: governance, commercialization, financing, technology, training, and climate mitigation. This framework provides policy recommendations for financial inclusion, direct market access, and technological innovation. The study offers a replicable model for policymakers, rural development agencies, and agricultural cooperatives, supporting sustainable and competitive family farming in Colombia and similar rural economies.

1. Introduction

Globally, family farming plays a crucial role in food production and food security [1]. Representing over 80% of the food consumed worldwide, this form of agriculture faces significant challenges, such as resource degradation, climate change, and the growing competitiveness of global markets [2]. However, the challenges faced by family farming extend beyond the local context; addressing them is essential to achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those related to zero hunger, environmental sustainability, and reducing inequalities [3].

Family farming is closely linked to the global market and rural economy. While small-scale farmers produce a significant share of the world’s food, they often struggle to access larger commercial networks and are disproportionately affected by fluctuations in international commodity prices. In many cases, their reliance on local and regional markets, coupled with limited bargaining power, reduces their competitiveness and profitability. The integration of smallholders into fairer and more resilient supply chains remains a central challenge for sustainable rural development.

In Latin America, a region renowned for its biodiversity and agricultural potential, family farming sustains millions of families and serves as a key driver of the rural economy. However, structural barriers such as limited access to technology, financial resources, and markets have perpetuated poverty and inequality. The region faces the dual challenge of strengthening this agricultural model to ensure food security for its inhabitants while enhancing its role in international markets through sustainable and competitive strategies.

Colombia exemplifies these challenges. With 70% of the country’s food produced by small family farmers [4,5], strengthening Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA) is vital for rural development [6]. This system, primarily reliant on family labor, emphasizes self-sufficiency and local economies rather than large-scale industrial farming. However, it remains highly vulnerable to economic and environmental pressures, including restricted access to credit, technological gaps, unfavorable market conditions, and climate change—all of which directly impact productivity, profitability, and competitiveness [7].

Lebrija, located in the department of Santander, Colombia, is recognized for its strong agricultural tradition, particularly in pineapple cultivation, earning it the title of the “Pineapple Capital of Colombia”. Small-scale farmers in this region primarily engage in family farming, cultivating crops such as pineapple, cacao, and citrus, with significant export potential. Despite agricultural yields surpassing national averages, these farmers face multidimensional poverty. According to the National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE), in 2018, the municipality’s multidimensional poverty rate stood at 27%, with rural areas accounting for 36.3% of that figure [8]. These statistics underscore the need for targeted interventions to overcome structural barriers and enhance agricultural sustainability.

This study aimed to develop a competitive model based on the interrelation between productivity, profitability, and competitiveness to strengthen PFCA in Lebrija. By defining productivity as resource efficiency, profitability as financial sustainability, and competitiveness as market resilience, this research provides a comprehensive framework for improving agricultural performance. Employing a mixed-methods approach, this research characterizes 79 family agricultural units (FAUs), identifies structural barriers, and proposes a strategic framework integrating technology, financing, education, market access, climate change, and public policy.

By structuring the model around productivity, profitability, and competitiveness, this study not only addresses the specific needs of Lebrija but also provides an adaptable framework for similar challenges in other rural areas of Colombia, Latin America, and beyond. The model’s extrapolation potential lies in its capacity to integrate the key variables that affect family farming, ensuring its applicability across diverse sociocultural and economic contexts. Ultimately, this research contributes to strengthening family farming as a pillar of sustainable development by offering practical and scalable solutions for rural communities and policymakers worldwide.

2. Literature Review

Family farming stands as a cornerstone of global food systems, not only for its capacity to supply a significant portion of the world’s food but also for its role in preserving sustainable agricultural practices and fostering rural community cohesion [9,10]. Beyond its productive function, this form of agriculture contributes to natural resource conservation, the strengthening of social networks, and the maintenance of cultural heritage within the territories where it operates, as described by Losch (2004) [11].

Nevertheless, its sustainability faces significant challenges stemming from environmental degradation, climate change, and the unequal dynamics of international markets. Overcoming these barriers is crucial to sustaining commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly in areas related to food security, poverty reduction, and the promotion of responsible agricultural practices [12,13].

In Latin America, family farming faces structural limitations related to access to technology, financing, and markets that have perpetuated poverty in these communities, restricting their competitiveness in international markets. Recent studies, such as those by Graeub et al. (2016), highlight that despite these barriers, family farming plays an essential role in environmental sustainability and agrobiodiversity, reaffirming its importance in global food security [5]. Meanwhile, social movements such as “La Vía Campesina” have championed agroecology as a transformative alternative to industrial agricultural practices, proposing models that promote smallholder autonomy and the resilience of their production systems.

The concept of family farming has evolved significantly over time. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it was conceived as a stabilizing element in European rural communities, particularly within the “Paysannerie” models that emphasized the connection between the peasantry and social cohesion [14]. By the mid-20th century, it was defined as an economic unit reliant on family labor, excluding external wage labor [15]. This theoretical framework was notably supported by Alexander Chayanov, who argued that peasant economies are driven by subsistence motivations, a dynamic contrasting with the profit-oriented logic of capitalism [16]. While peasant economies and family farming share common characteristics—such as reliance on household labor and a strong link to local economies—they are not identical. Peasant economies, as conceptualized by Chayanov, emphasize subsistence-oriented production with limited market integration, whereas family farming can incorporate commercial elements and actively participate in value chains [16]. This distinction is important for understanding the challenges faced by PFCA in Lebrija, as these farmers must navigate both subsistence needs and market competitiveness. Chayanov’s work underscores how the objectives of family farming transcend market values, focusing instead on self-sufficiency and the fulfillment of basic needs.

Additionally, researchers such as Bernstein (2008) have examined the impact of global forces on rural communities, emphasizing processes such as the commodification of subsistence and socioeconomic stratification within agricultural communities [17]. These analyses reveal how global markets have reshaped local dynamics, creating structural inequalities that hinder the development of family farming. In response to these transformations, Rosset et al. (2012) propose the concept of “recampesinization”—a strategy aimed at recovering traditional practices, fostering farmer autonomy, and strengthening agricultural systems against market dependency [18].

In Colombia, the sector grapples with significant hurdles, including restricted access to financial resources, inadequate technological support, and heightened vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. These challenges perpetuate cycles of rural poverty and limit the sector’s potential for growth and competitiveness. In the department of Santander, family farming forms the backbone of the local economy but faces persistent structural barriers, such as socio-economic inequalities. Lebrija’s case exemplifies the tensions and opportunities within family farming. Commercial intermediation remains the predominant marketing model, limiting farmers’ profitability and highlighting the need for short marketing circuits, as promoted by the FAO.

From a theoretical perspective, approaches such as the Actor–Network Theory (ANT) have been pivotal in analyzing the complex interactions between human and non-human actors in agricultural systems. This theory, developed by Latour et al. (1990), emphasizes how collaborative networks can serve as powerful tools for promoting rural development and facilitating smallholder integration into more equitable value chains [19].

In the context of family farming, three interconnected yet distinct concepts shape agricultural performance: productivity, profitability, and competitiveness. Productivity refers to the efficiency in transforming inputs (land, labor, and capital) into agricultural output, often measured through yield per hectare or labor efficiency [20,21]. Profitability, on the other hand, considers financial sustainability, accounting for revenues, costs, and net gains [22]. Competitiveness extends beyond individual farm efficiency to assess the ability of farmers to sustain and expand their activities in a dynamic market environment [23]. While productivity directly influences profitability by optimizing resource use and reducing costs, profitability enhances competitiveness by enabling reinvestment in innovation, infrastructure, and market access. However, competitiveness is also shaped by external factors such as policy frameworks, financing accessibility, and environmental resilience. Understanding these interconnections is crucial for designing strategies that enhance Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA) and its role in rural development.

Although the existing literature provides a solid foundation for understanding family farming, significant gaps persist. The lack of scalable models that integrate qualitative and quantitative perspectives to address structural barriers limits the effectiveness of current policies and strategies. Furthermore, the extrapolation of localized findings to international contexts remains a challenge, particularly in regions with similar socioeconomic and environmental characteristics.

The competitive model developed in this study is grounded in the theoretical perspectives discussed above, particularly the interrelations between productivity, profitability, and competitiveness in family farming. Drawing from Chayanov’s theory, the model acknowledges the dual economic and subsistence-oriented nature of smallholder agriculture, integrating financial sustainability as a critical factor for improving competitiveness. Bernstein’s perspective on market integration and socioeconomic stratification informs the analysis of how structural barriers—such as access to financing, technology, and commercialization—impact smallholder farmers’ ability to compete [17]. Additionally, the Actor–Network Theory (ANT) provides a framework for understanding how human and institutional interactions shape agricultural competitiveness, highlighting the role of policies, infrastructure, and cooperative networks in promoting rural development.

This study builds on these theories to construct a model that not only explains the barriers to competitiveness in PFCA but also proposes a replicable strategy to strengthen small-scale agriculture in similar contexts.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Approach

This study was developed as applied research, and it is described as the application of theoretical knowledge in practical contexts to generate relevant solutions to societal or productive sector challenges [24]. In this case, the research focuses on the collaboration between researchers and family farmers engaged in Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA) in the municipality of Lebrija, Santander. Additionally, it seeks to contribute to new knowledge that enriches the discipline of rural development and agricultural sustainability.

This research follows an explanatory approach, and as Hernández (2014) argued, it aims to answer not only the “what” of phenomena related to PFCA competitiveness but also the “why” and “how” they occur, exploring the causes and conditions that drive them [25]. This study examines the relationships between competitiveness (dependent variable) and six limiting dimensions (independent variables): financial, technological, cultural-formative, commercialization, governmental, and climatic–soil. This approach facilitates the identification of intervention models that explain and predict conditions to improve the profitability and productivity of farmers.

The methodological approach is mixed, integrating qualitative and quantitative methods which allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon under investigation [26,27]. Quantitative data provided statistically robust results through correspondence and correlation analyses conducted using R software (2024.09.1 + 394), while qualitative methods delved into farmers’ meanings and perceptions through techniques such as participatory workshops and thematic analysis. This methodological combination ensures data triangulation to strengthen the validity and reliability of the findings.

3.2. Methodological Design

The methodological process was structured into three interconnected phases. The first involved characterizing the socio-demographic, economic, and environmental conditions of family farmers in Lebrija. This phase, conducted between August and November 2022, included the design and validation of a survey instrument for data collection, reviewed by experts in family agriculture and research methodologies. Additionally, participatory workshops were conducted to contextualize the problem and gather qualitative data on agricultural practices, perceptions, and limitations.

The second phase involved an in-depth statistical analysis of the collected variables. Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) was selected to examine associations among categorical variables and to explore structural barriers affecting productivity, profitability, and competitiveness. MCA is particularly useful for identifying hidden patterns in qualitative data, which is essential for understanding how different constraints (e.g., financing, technology access, and climate adaptation) interact in the context of family farming. This technique allows for the graphical representation of associations between multiple categorical variables, providing a clear visualization of relationships that would otherwise remain undetected.

Additionally, ordinal logistic regression (OLR) was employed to determine the impact of key predictors on competitiveness-related indicators such as land use efficiency, productivity, economic gain, and economic satisfaction. This method was chosen because competitiveness in family farming is not a binary outcome, but a spectrum influenced by multiple factors. OLR enables the analysis of ordered categorical dependent variables, making it well suited for modeling the likelihood of different competitiveness levels as a function of explanatory variables such as financial access, commercialization strategies, and technical assistance. The statistical analyses were conducted using the R software, utilizing specialized packages such as FactoMineR [28] and ggplot2 [29], ensuring robust processing and the effective visualization of results.

The third phase consisted of designing a strategic plan to strengthen PFCA competitiveness in Lebrija. This plan was based on the findings of the previous phases, complemented by a documentary analysis of key public policies, such as Resolution 464 of Colombia [30], and national and departmental development plans. A strategic formulation matrix was used to define specific actions for each identified limiting dimension.

3.3. Population Sample and Data Collection

The sample selection for this study followed a non-probabilistic quota sampling method, dividing the population into 57 “veredas” (villages) according to the latest national agricultural census. Although an exact census of family farmers in Lebrija is unavailable, this technique allowed for the selection of significant representatives from each vereda based on criteria such as the landholding size, the type of crop, and PFCA experience. This approach ensured a diverse and adequate representation of the study population.

Regarding data collection, three participatory workshops were conducted to create spaces for co-creation and dialogue, facilitating the identification of farmers’ needs, perceptions, and priorities. The first workshop (25 September 2022) gathered 70 farmers to introduce the study and validate the survey instrument. The second phase (19–21 October 2022) involved field visits to seven rural districts, engaging 10 farms to document real-life agricultural conditions. The final workshop (17 March 2023) included 56 farmers in a collaborative session to identify key challenges and co-develop strategies to enhance Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA). These sessions not only enrich the understanding of the local context but also empower participants, aligning with the principles of Participatory Action Research (PAR). Surveys, on the other hand, collected specific data on the defined dimensions and were applied with the support of local community leaders to maximize participation.

In terms of qualitative analysis, data collected during the workshops were organized and analyzed using thematic analysis, following Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-phase approach: data familiarization, coding, theme identification, theme review, theme definition, and final interpretation [31]. This process was conducted using transcriptions of workshop discussions, field notes, and participant statements, allowing for the emergence of themes directly from the data. The coding process was primarily inductive, ensuring that themes were drawn from participants’ experiences while also considering relevant concepts from the literature to maintain consistency with existing theoretical frameworks. This approach provided a balanced interpretation, grounding findings in the lived realities of family farmers while aligning them with broader discussions on agricultural competitiveness. The iterative nature of the analysis allowed for systematic refinement and the categorization of codes, ensuring coherence and depth in the qualitative insights. This methodological integration ensured a holistic perspective on the conditions and challenges faced by family farmers in Lebrija.

Finally, to support the conceptual and methodological framework of this study, a bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Scopus database. This analysis identified the most relevant trends in research on family farming and competitiveness, guiding both the design of the data collection instrument and the development of the strategic plan.

4. Results

4.1. Phase 1: Characterization of Family Farmers

The characterization of family farmers (UAF) in the municipality of Lebrija was developed by considering three key dimensions: sociodemographic, economic, and environmental dimensions. This comprehensive analysis, based on data collected through surveys, participatory workshops, and field visits, enabled the identification of the main challenges and endogenous capacities of this population, essential for strengthening Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA).

Table 1. Challenges and findings by dimension.

Dimension	Finding	Description
Sociodemographic	Limited Educational Level	Most participants have a basic or incomplete education level, restricting their access to technical information and training programs.
	Quality of Life Perceived as Regular	Despite challenges, farmers maintain a strong connection to rural life but perceive their quality of life as insufficient due to limited access to basic services and opportunities.
	Lack of Institutional Support	The absence of effective public policies addressing their needs, such as technical assistance, credit access, and agricultural training programs, represents a significant obstacle.
Economic	Difficulties in Accessing Financing	High interest rates, insufficient grace periods, and limited public and private financing options hinder financial sustainability for UAF.
	High Costs of Inputs and Machinery	Acquiring the tools and technologies needed for agricultural modernization remains a significant challenge.
	Dependence on Commercial Intermediaries	Farmers face reduced profit margins due to intermediary intervention in the commercialization of their products.
Environmental	Natural Resource Management	Farmers adopt agroecological practices to promote soil, biodiversity, and water conservation but face challenges such as river contamination and deforestation.
	Climate Vulnerability	Phenomena such as frost, droughts, and changes in rainfall patterns directly impact crop productivity.
	Lack of Environmental Infrastructure	While farmers have developed their strategies for land restoration, investments in infrastructure and training are needed to mitigate climate change impacts.

describes the main challenges and findings by dimension.

These communities also possess a set of endogenous capacities, which were systematically identified through a combination of structured surveys, participatory workshops, and field visits involving 79 family agricultural units (FAUs). The analysis revealed that 84% of farmers rely on intergenerational knowledge transfer, 76% engage in agroecological practices, and 92% participate in family labor dynamics, reinforcing the role of traditional agricultural systems in maintaining rural resilience. These capacities allow farmers to optimize resources, adapt to climate variability, and maintain local food security despite structural limitations.

Table 2. Endogenous capacities by dimension.

Dimension	Identified Endogenous Capacity
Sociodemographic	Family teamwork in agricultural activities.
	Transmission of traditional knowledge and agricultural techniques by elders and parents.
	Local and regional food security.
	Multifunctionality of family members.
	Conflict resolution to harmonize peaceful coexistence in rural areas.
	Community and associative leadership for land management, transport services, and resource access.
	Entrepreneurial mindset for transforming agricultural products.
Economic	Availability of land for cultivation.
	Direct sales of agricultural products in local markets or through intermediaries.
	Multifunctionality of agricultural activity.
	Planning and control of agricultural income and expenses.
	Adoption of new technologies and agricultural practices for modernization.
Environmental	Conservation of biodiversity through the cultivation of species adapted to their natural environment.
	Risk management to address agricultural challenges such as droughts, floods, and crop diseases.
	Agroecological practices in cultivation.
	Soil care and land restoration.

presents the identified endogenous capacities by dimension. The classification of these capacities was informed by qualitative coding of participatory workshop data and cross-validation with survey responses. This approach aligns with previous studies on rural resilience and agricultural sustainability [11,18], which highlights how smallholder communities leverage traditional knowledge and community networks to sustain agricultural productivity under adverse conditions.

In turn, the detailed analysis of the challenges faced by family farmers is closely linked to the constraints defined in this study’s methodology: financial, technological, commercialization, formative, climatological, and governmental. These constraints do not operate in isolation but are interconnected in complex ways, exacerbating challenges to the competitiveness of Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA). For example, a lack of adequate financing (financial constraint) limits the acquisition of necessary machinery and technologies (technological constraint), which, in turn, reduces farmers’ capacity to enhance productivity and adapt to climate change (climatological constraint). Similarly, low levels of mechanization, combined with the absence of agricultural collection centers (commercialization constraint), increase dependence on intermediaries, reducing profit margins and creating a perception of economic dissatisfaction.

Moreover, these barriers are compounded by a lack of technical training (formative constraint), which hinders farmers’ ability to adopt agroecological practices or effective market strategies. Finally, weak integration with governmental policies and the absence of specific incentives (governmental constraint) perpetuate structural inequalities and limit access to rural support programs.

Table 3. Main challenges and their relationship with constraints.

Challenge	Associated Constrain
Difficulty accessing financing for agricultural systems	Financial
High credit interest rates
Lack of government support for machinery and input financing
Short credit grace periods
Lack of training in financial advisory
Absence of incentives, such as technical tools and training from public and private entities
Low level of crop mechanization due to a lack of machinery, tools, and training	Technological
High intervention by intermediaries in commercialization	Commercialization
High costs of agricultural inputs
Lack of agricultural collection centers for crops other than cacao or coffee
Low levels of training for farmers and their families in agricultural topics	Formative
Lack of internet access in rural areas for youth and children
Economic constraints to travel to training programs occasionally offered by local government
Absence of incentives for young people to study agricultural topics
Lack of investment in technological resources and knowledge to prevent and mitigate climate impacts	Climatological
Lack of organization and support among farmers to safeguard and conserve seeds as a measure against climate change
Indiscriminate deforestation
River pollution from wastewater dumping
Crop damage from frost or droughts
Weak integration with national policies and rural populations	Governmental
Lack of incentives and subsidies for seeds, machinery, technology, and entrepreneurial initiatives for farmers

synthesizes these main challenges, highlighting their direct connection to each constraint and providing the foundation for strategies to promote the sustainability and competitiveness of the family farming sector.

The characterization of family farmers in the municipality of Lebrija provides a comprehensive perspective that highlights both the structural challenges and the endogenous capacities of this population concerning Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA). The identified constraints interact dynamically, reinforcing existing barriers and hindering the strengthening of the sector’s competitiveness.

On the one hand, farmers face significant obstacles such as limited access to adequate financing, a lack of machinery and technological tools, and the absence of effective technical training programs. These constraints not only reduce productivity and profitability but also limit their ability to implement agroecological practices and adapt to changing climatic conditions. Additionally, the reliance on intermediaries in commercialization increases costs and reduces profit margins, leading to dissatisfaction and demotivation among this population.

Similarly, the analysis highlights a set of endogenous capacities that represent invaluable resources to address these challenges. These include the intergenerational transmission of knowledge, the adoption of agroecological practices, and the ability to organize and lead community initiatives. These strengths can be leveraged through public policies that promote mechanization, training, and market access, thereby fostering the sustainability and resilience of PFCA.

In conclusion, the findings of this first phase of the research not only reveal the main problems affecting family farmers in Lebrija but also provide a solid foundation for designing comprehensive strategies aimed at strengthening PFCA. These strategies must focus on mitigating the identified constraints while harnessing farmers’ endogenous capacities to transform current challenges into opportunities for sustainable development. The potential impact of these actions transcends the local context, contributing to rural development, food security, and environmental sustainability on a broader scale.

4.2. Phase 2: Correspondence and Correlation Analysis

4.2.1. Correspondence Analysis

The multiple correspondence analysis identified significant associations among categorical variables related to the dimensions of productivity, profitability, and competitiveness, which are fundamental to the dependent variable in this study: the competitiveness of Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA). This statistical approach highlights how factors identified by farmers critically impact these dimensions, underscoring the need to address them in an interconnected manner to promote sustainable development.

Table 4. Influential categories in the analyzed dimensions.

Dimension	Category
Productivity	Access to public and private credit.
	Availability of accompaniment, training, and technical assistance.
	Use of irrigation systems in crop production.
Profitability	Commercial partnerships with private companies.
	Fulfillment of bank credit repayments.
	Membership in associations and/or agricultural cooperatives.
Competitiveness	Access to financial credit from public and private entities.
	Knowledge of plans and strategies to mitigate the impact of climate change.

summarizes the key categories associated with the three core dimensions analyzed: productivity, profitability, and competitiveness. While these dimensions are interrelated, they capture different aspects of family farming performance. Productivity reflects the efficiency of resource use, profitability assesses financial sustainability, and competitiveness considers the ability to maintain and expand agricultural activity in a market-driven context.

In this context, “access to public and private credit” under productivity refers to financing directly used for purchasing inputs, irrigation systems, and mechanization to enhance efficiency. Meanwhile, “access to financial credit from public and private entities” under competitiveness addresses the long-term financial stability of farmers, including their ability to sustain investments, navigate economic fluctuations, and remain competitive in evolving market conditions.

Regarding the productivity dimension, the results indicate that only 37% of farmers (29 out of 79) fully utilize their land for cultivation, and only 21 consider their land to be productive or highly productive. This highlights an urgent need to improve access to resources such as irrigation systems and technical training to optimize land use.

In terms of profitability, 71% of farmers (56 out of 79) perceive that their earnings do not meet their economic expectations, with 31 of these respondents rating their economic satisfaction as acceptable or insufficient. These findings reflect significant limitations in farmers’ ability to translate their efforts into sustainable economic benefits.

Finally, within the competitiveness dimension, 77% of farmers (61 out of 79) believe that an increase in crop productivity would generate higher incomes, positively impacting their quality of life. This finding emphasizes the need to develop strategies to address the identified structural barriers, such as access to financing and climate change mitigation efforts.

Figure 1, generated using R software, displays the ten most representative associations among the categorical variables of the analyzed dimensions, based on the survey responses of participating farmers. This chart provides a clear visualization of the key relationships that should be prioritized to foster PFCA competitiveness and sustainability.

In addition, the correspondence analysis revealed detailed associations between specific categorical variables, identifying their levels of impact on the dimensions of productivity and profitability.

Table 5. A summary of the limiting aspects and impacted dimensions from the R analysis.

Association in the R Graph	Explanatory Categorical Variables of the Association	Impact Level	Impacted Dimension
a	Direct marketing to consumers without intermediaries	High	Profitability
	Governmental support provided by the municipal administration
b	Beneficiary of state subsidies	High	Profitability
	Financial support and advisory services from the state
c	Public and private financial credit support	High	Productivity
	Governmental support provided by the municipal administration
d	Reduction in or stabilization of agricultural input prices	Medium	Profitability
	Reduction in or stabilization of costs for factors such as agricultural inputs, labor, and transportation
e	Beneficiary of state subsidies	Medium	Profitability
	Governmental support provided by the municipal administration
	Acquisition of agricultural machinery and technical assistance
f	Accompaniment, training, and technical assistance	High	Productivity
	Plans to address the impact of climate change
g	Reduction in or stabilization of costs for factors such as agricultural inputs, labor, and transportation	High	Profitability
	Reduction in or stabilization of agricultural input prices
h	Use of fertilizers and organic compost	High	Productivity
	Consequences of climate change
	Governmental support provided by the municipal administration
i	Acquisition of machinery and tools for agricultural work	High	Productivity
	Use of irrigation systems
j	Payment of bank loans	High	Profitability
	Commercial linkage with private companies

provides an additional summary of these findings, linking the associations identified in the graph to the limitations and affected dimensions. The table highlights the specific associations in the correspondence graph, demonstrating how each categorical variable contributes to the overall results. This analysis underscores the importance of developing strategies to target the factors identified as having the greatest impact, such as direct marketing, financial support, technical training, and access to technology.

While productivity and profitability emerge as directly impacted dimensions in the correspondence analysis, competitiveness is a broader outcome influenced by these factors. Since competitiveness encompasses multiple structural aspects—including financial stability, market access, and resilience—its impact is observed indirectly through the interactions between productivity and profitability. The relationships outlined in Table 5 reflect this dynamic, where competitiveness is shaped by but not explicitly categorized within individual associations.

Additionally, governmental support provided by the municipal administration emerged as a relevant factor in the participatory workshops, where farmers expressed concerns about limited access to public policies in technical assistance and financing. This perception was further validated through multiple correspondence analysis which identified significant associations between governmental support and key dimensions such as access to financial credit, the acquisition of agricultural machinery, and the availability of training programs. These findings highlight the role of public policies in enhancing productivity and profitability, reinforcing the need for structured governmental interventions.

Thus, the multiple correspondence analysis provides a comprehensive perspective on the interactions among productivity, profitability, and competitiveness. These results offer a robust foundation for designing strategies aimed at improving the quality of life of family farmers in Lebrija. Future actions should be implemented at the local level, with governmental support and international cooperation prioritizing specific interventions in financing, technical training, and environmental sustainability.

4.2.2. Correlation Analysis

The correlation analysis was conducted using ordinal logistic regression (OLR) models implemented in the R software to identify the most significant predictors influencing four key indicators of agricultural competitiveness: land use efficiency (APRV), crop productivity (PROD), economic gain (GAN), and economic satisfaction (SAT). These indicators align conceptually with the broader categories of productivity, profitability, and competitiveness, providing an empirical foundation to evaluate the structural and economic constraints faced by family farmers in Lebrija. The Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) was used to select the most appropriate models, ensuring statistical robustness.

Table 6. Summary of ordinal logistic regression results.

Indicator	Predictor Variable	Coefficient	Error	T Value
Land Use Efficiency (APRV)	Access to financial credit	−2.1270	0.8132	−2.616
	Infrastructure support	4.3166	1.5923	2.711
Crop Productivity (PROD)	Fertilizer use	5.8143	1.8352	3.168
	Irrigation system availability	−3.8621	1.4751	−2.618
Economic Gain (GAN)	Direct sales to consumers	−25.391	1.4808	−17.146
	Government subsidies	23.308	1.1953	19.500
Economic Satisfaction (SAT)	Access to credit	1.3234	0.7418	1.784
	Dependence on intermediaries	−3.8341	1.9937	−1.923

summarizes the results of the ordinal logistic regression models, highlighting the key predictors and their effects on the dependent variables.

Land use efficiency, a key determinant of productivity, was found to be significantly affected by financial and infrastructural constraints. The regression results indicated that limited access to credit negatively impacts land use efficiency, as reflected in the coefficient of −2.1270 for financial credit access. This suggests that farmers with restricted access to credit struggle to expand their cultivated land, reinforcing previous findings that highlight financial exclusion as a major barrier in rural agriculture. Conversely, infrastructure support demonstrated a strong positive relationship (4.3166), indicating that improved roads, irrigation systems, and market connectivity significantly enhance land utilization. These findings align with survey responses, where 65 out of 79 farmers (82.3%) cited high input costs and lack of credit as primary constraints in optimizing land use.

Crop productivity was primarily influenced by the availability of agricultural inputs and irrigation systems. The use of fertilizers and organic compost exhibited a strong positive effect (5.8143), reinforcing the idea that improved soil fertility management enhances yields. However, the absence of irrigation infrastructure had a negative impact, with a coefficient of −3.8621, demonstrating the vulnerability of agricultural productivity to water availability. Notably, 66 out of 79 farmers (83.5%) reported that fertilizer access and organic compost application were essential for maintaining soil productivity, yet many still faced constraints in securing adequate inputs. Consequently, it is crucial to design programs that encourage the use of sustainable practices, such as organic fertilization, complemented by stronger institutional support.

Economic gain, which serves as a measure of profitability, was strongly influenced by market access and government support mechanisms. The results indicate that direct sales to consumers significantly increased farmers’ earnings, while dependence on intermediaries led to financial losses, as evidenced by a negative coefficient of −25.391. Similarly, government subsidies had a highly positive effect (23.308), suggesting that financial aid programs play a crucial role in stabilizing household incomes. Despite these positive associations, 36% of surveyed farmers reported that their earnings remained below expectations, highlighting a persistent dependency on intermediaries that erodes profit margins. Therefore, it is essential to establish programs that promote direct marketing and integrate farmers into more equitable value chains, which would enhance their income and the profitability of their agricultural practices.

Economic satisfaction, a proxy for competitiveness, was found to be closely tied to financial security and commercialization strategies. Farmers with higher credit access reported greater satisfaction, reflected in a coefficient of 1.3234, whereas reliance on intermediaries had a negative impact (−3.8341). The observed trends suggest that competitiveness in family farming is not solely a function of productivity or profitability but also of financial autonomy and access to equitable market structures. Among the surveyed farmers, 40.5% (32 out of 79) identified financial credit and commercial partnerships as critical factors in improving their economic stability. These findings reinforce the argument that agricultural policies should integrate financial inclusion strategies with direct market access initiatives to ensure long-term competitiveness.

The regression results provide a comprehensive empirical validation of the key constraints affecting Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA) in Lebrija. The findings highlight the need for multi-dimensional interventions that address both economic and structural barriers. Strengthening financial credit programs, expanding agricultural input accessibility, and promoting direct commercialization models emerge as priority strategies for enhancing agricultural competitiveness. These insights not only contribute to the local agricultural policy framework but also offer a replicable model for similar rural economies facing financial and infrastructural constraints.

The observed relationships confirm that financial and structural factors are deeply interconnected with productivity, profitability, and competitiveness. The strong negative effect of credit restrictions on land use efficiency and economic satisfaction underscores the need for accessible financial instruments tailored to smallholder farmers. Similarly, the significant impact of direct commercialization on economic gain reinforces the role of short supply chains and market diversification as strategies to improve profitability. Addressing these barriers requires a holistic policy approach that integrates financial inclusion, infrastructure investment, and sustainable agricultural practices.

The implications of these findings extend beyond the case of Lebrija, providing a foundation for broader discussions on agricultural resilience and economic sustainability in rural Latin America. The identified predictors and their effects serve as a valuable reference for policymakers, development agencies, and researchers seeking to enhance the competitiveness of family farming in structurally constrained environments.

4.3. Phase 3: Strategic Action Plan for Developing Rural Agricultural Competitiveness

The development of the strategic action plan for Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA) in Lebrija constitutes a comprehensive effort to address the main limitations identified in the previous phases of this study while leveraging the endogenous capacities of family farmers. Aligned with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and national rural development policies, the plan aims to enhance the economic viability, resilience, and sustainability of small-scale agriculture in the region.

The plan’s structure is based on the socio-demographic, economic, and environmental analysis of farmers, complemented by the statistical findings from correspondence and correlation analyses. These results identified six interconnected strategic axes: governance, commercialization, financing, technology, training, and climate mitigation. These axes are translated into specific programs with clear objectives designed to address structural limitations, promote agricultural modernization, and strengthen market access.

The proposed programs, structured within these six axes, address both the identified limitations and the development opportunities for PFCA in Lebrija.

Table 7. Strategic axes, programs, and objectives.

Strategic Axis	Program	Program Objective
Governance	Strengthening government–farmer linkages	Enhance policy integration and public support mechanisms for PFCA competitiveness.
Commercialization	Sustainable market access program	Reduce dependency on intermediaries through digital marketplaces and direct sales channels.
Financing	Formalizing financial inclusion for small-scale farmers	Improve access to public and private financing with tailored credit mechanisms.
Technology	Adoption of productivity-enhancing technologies	Introduce cost-effective irrigation, mechanization, and sustainable agricultural innovations.
Training	Rural education and capacity-building program	Provide continuous training in technical, financial, and agroecological best practices.
Climate Mitigation	Climate adaptation strategies for PFCA	Strengthen resilience through climate-smart farming and risk management initiatives.

summarizes the strategic objectives of each axis:

To operationalize these strategic axes, specific projects have been designed, ensuring measurable impact.

Table 8. Specific projects.

Strategic Axis	Strategic Action	Expected Results
Governance	Creation of multi-stakeholder working groups	Increased policy alignment and farmer participation in decision-making.
Commercialization	Development of digital platforms for direct sales.	Reduced intermediary dependency and improved farmer revenue.
Financing	Implementation of preferential credit lines	Increased access to financing and reduced economic vulnerability.
Technology	Distribution of mechanization and irrigation kits	Enhanced productivity and resource efficiency.
Training	Capacity-building in agroecology and sustainable practices	Strengthened technical skills and knowledge transfer among farmers.
Climate Mitigation	Establishment of climate-resilient seed banks	Greater adaptation to environmental variability and biodiversity conservation.

presents some of the key initiatives that will drive the plan’s implementation.

5. Discussion

A critical insight from this study is the paradox of self-sufficiency versus economic vulnerability. PFCA thrives on strong intergenerational knowledge transfer, family labor, and agroecological practices—elements that ensure resilience but can also become structural barriers when combined with financial exclusion, outdated production techniques, and reliance on intermediaries.

This paradox poses a major challenge: resilience sustains production, but without modernization, it risks stagnation. If not addressed, the very strengths of family farming could become obstacles to innovation and competitiveness. Studies on smallholder farming have similarly documented how self-sufficiency can inadvertently perpetuate economic stagnation when not complemented by modernization strategies [32]. This study confirms that PFCA farmers in Lebrija exhibit strong adaptability, but their economic prospects remain constrained by institutional and structural limitations.

From a market perspective, the high reliance on intermediaries observed in this study is consistent with findings in Latin American rural economies, where smallholder farmers face significant commercialization disadvantages due to fragmented supply chains and unequal bargaining power [11]. The lack of direct market access not only reduces profitability but also limits reinvestment potential, reinforcing cycles of economic dependency. However, successful agricultural transitions in similar contexts have shown that financial support alone is insufficient. Instead, combining financial aid with digital market integration and cooperative organization has been shown to significantly improve competitiveness [18].

Similarly, financial exclusion emerges as a key constraint in agricultural competitiveness. Farmers with restricted credit access demonstrated lower levels of land use efficiency, productivity, and economic satisfaction, a widely observed trend in rural economies [16]. However, this study reveals that credit access alone does not guarantee improved outcomes unless it is accompanied by technical assistance and adaptive financing mechanisms. Research on sustainable agricultural initiatives in Latin America suggests that blended financial instruments—such as microcredit tailored to small-scale farmers, flexible loan structures, and risk-sharing mechanisms—yield better long-term results [33].

Thus, while PFCA remains a pillar of food security and rural livelihoods, its long-term viability depends on balancing traditional strengths with structural modernization. The strategic axes of governance, commercialization, financing, technology, training, and climate mitigation provide a structured roadmap for this transition. However, ensuring that these strategies translate into sustained improvements requires robust evaluation mechanisms.

Many well-intended agricultural policies have failed due to insufficient follow-up and adaptation to local conditions [33]. Therefore, implementing a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework is crucial to ensure the plan’s effectiveness. Key performance indicators include the following:

• An increase in the cultivated area under improved technologies: This is measured as the percentage of agricultural land incorporating advanced technologies, such as irrigation systems, organic fertilization, and specialized machinery, compared to the total cultivated area.
• The percentage of farmers trained in sustainable practices: This is the proportion of farmers completing technical training programs in agroecological practices, soil conservation, and climate management relative to the total expected participants.
• A reduction in the average cost of agricultural inputs: This is the percentage difference in the costs of key inputs (fertilizers, seeds, and machinery) before and after the plan’s implementation, serving as an indicator of improved profitability.
• An increase in farmer participation in digital and local markets: This is the growth in the number of farmers directly marketing their products through digital platforms or local markets, measured in absolute and percentage terms.

Beyond monitoring progress, effective implementation will require cross-sector collaboration. Local governments, financial institutions, and market stakeholders must align their efforts to create an enabling environment for smallholder competitiveness. This study suggests that scaling the proposed model to other Latin American regions could offer a replicable strategy for improving smallholder competitiveness in structurally constrained environments.

This study contributes to the broader debate on the future of smallholder agriculture in emerging economies, emphasizing that resilience must be leveraged as a driver of transformation rather than a mechanism for survival. Future research should explore the longitudinal impacts of financial and policy interventions, ensuring that the proposed solutions translate into sustained improvements in agricultural livelihoods.

6. Conclusions and Limitations

This study provides a structured and data-driven approach to understanding the competitiveness of Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA) in Lebrija, identifying both structural barriers and endogenous capacities. Through a mixed-methods approach, key limitations—including financial constraints, technological gaps, and weak market access—were found, along with strategic levers that can enhance productivity, profitability, and competitiveness in family farming.

The results highlight financial access as the most critical factor influencing competitiveness, shaping farmers’ ability to invest in improved technologies, mechanization, and direct commercialization channels. Dependence on intermediaries exacerbates economic vulnerability by reducing profit margins and limiting reinvestment potential. Additionally, the findings reveal a critical paradox: while PFCA benefits from strong intergenerational knowledge transfer, family labor, and agroecological practices, these strengths can become constraints when paired with restricted financing, outdated production techniques, and a reliance on intermediaries. Although resilience allows family farmers to sustain production under challenging conditions, without external support and structural reforms, it risks perpetuating stagnation rather than promoting competitiveness.

One of the critical insights from this research is that competitiveness in PFCA is not a singular outcome but a dynamic interplay between land use efficiency, productivity, economic gains, and financial autonomy. Addressing these barriers requires holistic interventions, not isolated interventions.

This study demonstrates how integrating qualitative and quantitative methodologies provides a comprehensive understanding of the structural barriers and opportunities for PFCA in Lebrija. The combination of participatory workshops and surveys allowed for an in-depth exploration of farmers’ lived experiences and challenges, while MCA revealed the underlying relationships among key socioeconomic and environmental factors. Additionally, the OLR models quantified the impact of financial access, infrastructure, and commercialization strategies on competitiveness-related indicators, reinforcing the empirical validity of the findings. By intertwining these methodological approaches, we constructed a holistic narrative that captures both the structural constraints and the adaptive capacities of family farmers, offering a replicable model for enhancing agricultural competitiveness in similar rural contexts.

The strategic action plan proposed in this study establishes six key axes—governance, commercialization, financing, technology, training, and climate mitigation—providing a replicable framework for policy and institutional efforts. Strengthening financial inclusion, market access, and technological adoption emerges as a priority. Future policies must recognize smallholder farmers as key economic agents, ensuring tailored credit, direct commercialization mechanisms, and sustainable innovation strategies.

Ultimately, this study presents a scalable model for strengthening PFCA beyond Lebrija, offering insights applicable to other rural regions in Latin America. The paradox of self-sufficiency vs. economic vulnerability must be actively managed, leveraging the strengths of family farming while preventing these from becoming barriers to innovation. The future of PFCA competitiveness depends on a multi-level commitment to structural transformation, financial empowerment, and inclusive, sustainable development policies.

Limitations

While this study provides valuable insights into the competitiveness of Peasant, Family, and Community Agriculture (PFCA) in Lebrija, certain limitations must be acknowledged. First, the research is based on a sample of 79 family agricultural units (FAUs), which, although representative of the study area, may not fully capture the diversity of agricultural practices and constraints in other regions. Additionally, this study focuses on specific structural and economic factors, and while the mixed-methods approach provides a comprehensive analysis, other unobserved variables, such as social capital dynamics or informal market interactions, may also play a significant role. Finally, the findings are context-specific, and while the proposed framework offers a replicable model, its applicability to different rural settings requires further validation. Future research should expand the geographical scope, incorporate longitudinal data to assess long-term impacts, and explore additional socio-economic variables that may influence PFCA competitiveness.